Legal Opinion

Ruddiman v. Scow Platform

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Decided March 30, 1889PublishedCited by 11 opinions

In Admiralty. Action for wharfage.

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The libelant sues for wharfage of a scow platform along-side his dock walk, at One Hundred and Thirty-Eighth street, Harlem river, from November, 1886, to November, 1887. No lien under the state law can be claimed, as no specification of claim has been filed, and more than a year has elapsed. To admit of a maritime lien, the scow structure must be a “vessel,” within the meaning of the maritime law. I am of opinion that the structure in question, though afloat, is not such a vessel, because it was not designed or used for the purpose of navigation, nor engaged in the uses of commerce, nor in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cope v. Vallette Dry Dock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. The Hendrick HudsonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1869
  3. The Hezekiah BaldwinDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1876
  4. Jones v. Coal BargesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1855

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Lozman v. City of Riviera BeachSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
  2. Evansville & Bowling Green Packet Co. v. Chero Cola Bottling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. Charles Barnes Co. v. One Dredge BoatDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1909
  4. Berton v. Tietjen & Lang Dry Dock Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1915
  5. Koernschild v. W.H. Streit, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1993

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API